Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35968379›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2022

Flavor science in the context of research on electronic cigarettes.

John E Hayes, Allison N Baker

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The COVID-19 and Taste Lab: A Mini Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience on Taste Differences and COVID-19 Susceptibility.Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

John E HayesSensory Evaluation Center, College of Agricultural Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, United States.
Allison N BakerSensory Evaluation Center, College of Agricultural Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Thousands start smoking or vaping daily, despite long-standing efforts by public health authorities to curb initiation and use of nicotine containing products. Over the last 15 years, use of electronic nicotine delivery systems has increased dramatically, with a diverse range of products on the market, including pod-based, disposable, and refillable electronic cigarettes (eCigs). Originally intended for harm reduction and smoking cessation, eCigs may encourage nicotine use among never smokers, given the vast range of appealing flavors that are available. To better understand abuse liability and to facilitate appropriate regulations, it is crucial to understand the science of flavor, and flavor perception within the context of eCig use. Here, we (a) provide a brief primer on chemosensory perception and flavor science for addiction and nicotine researchers, and (b) highlight existing some literature regarding flavor and nicotine use, with specific attention given to individual differences in perception, and interaction between different sensory modalities that contribute to flavor. Dramatic increases in use of eCigs highlights the importance of flavor science in contemporary addiction research, both with regards to public health and regulatory efforts. Other recent work summarizes findings on flavored e-liquids and eCig use, but none have focused explicitly on chemosensory processes or flavor perception as they relate to appeal and use of such products. We argue flavor science needs to be considered as perceptual and behavioral phenomena, and not merely from analytical, toxicological and pharmacological perspectives; we help address this gap here.

Indexed as

chemesthesisflavorperceptionsensory evaluationsmellsmokingtaste

Identifiers

PMID35968379
PMCPMC9365686

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.